Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#81

Post by spaniard89277 »

TOMDM wrote: post #56
spaniard89277 wrote: post #36

Housing and land is a non-transable good, and therefore there should be heavy state intervention on it, preferably by doing the same as Vienna, which is holding >40% of the renting stock and charging according to income, and renting to a representative distribution of tenants so to prevent guettos. Rent is the main detractor of disposable income which hurts the rest of the economy, and property owners provide almost…

> CMV Rent is high because the demand in large cities majorly out strips supply. All policies that attempt to address housing costs that don't increase supply are treating a symptom and not the underlying cause.

The policy I mention is precisely that, public housing being at least 40% of the supply. If demand increases, you increase supply.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#82

Post by nickles »

spaniard89277 wrote: post #74
nickles wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> should be heavy state intervention on it, preferably by doing the same as Vienna, which is holding >40% of the renting stock and charging according to income This is great policy if you want to make housing unaffordable. When supply is less than demand, prices go up. Those price increases incentivize builders to increase the housing stock (which subsequently lowers prices). Capping prices prevents the price mechani…

Yet it isn't working in most european cities. Price increases and capital holders always build behind the offer/demand curve so they get a better yield from it. Also, rent is always high enough to milk as much as possible from modal income, as demand is pretty inelastic. Also, read carefully, I don't want price control directly onto the private sector but the adminsitration controlling a big chunk of the offer.

> I don't want price control directly onto the private sector but the adminsitration controlling a big chunk of the offer.

If the government sets prices for 40% of the market, it’s price control by definition.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#83

Post by anovikov »

II2II wrote: post #30
anovikov wrote: post #2

Is this an average for newly signed rent, or for the average one already paid now? If former, it looks incredibly low. I mean, this is what you pay for an above-average (but not posh) place in East Europe capitals, and for pretty much average ones in old European cities like Paris or Munich.

From the article: > If those numbers seem low — after all there are headlines about 40% rent increases — it's because the CPI measure includes renewal rents, the price you pay when you renew your lease.

So right, just as i have expected. And vast majority of these renewed leases are regulated ones, being renewed from the Carter era if not before.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#84

Post by nickles »

karatinversion wrote: post #73
nickles wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> should be heavy state intervention on it, preferably by doing the same as Vienna, which is holding >40% of the renting stock and charging according to income This is great policy if you want to make housing unaffordable. When supply is less than demand, prices go up. Those price increases incentivize builders to increase the housing stock (which subsequently lowers prices). Capping prices prevents the price mechani…

> Those price increases incentivize builders to increase the housing stock Of course this does not work if building new housing is illegal, in which case you might as well have the rent control.

> Of course this does not work if building new housing is illegal, in which case you might as well have the rent control.

Or make it possible to build new housing. Rent control is a subsidy to existing residents to the detriment of people who would otherwise move to the area.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#85

Post by settrans »

ricardobeat wrote: post #59

This is why you need rent control. 100% of this price hike is going into landlord's pockets, it's not a result of inflation.

Indeed! What we need is a wealth transfer from new residents paying _even higher_ market prices to legacy tenants grandfathered in to apartments that landlords have no incentive to maintain.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#86

Post by disantlor »

jononomo wrote: post #68

I decided about four years ago that it just doesn’t make sense to live in NYC if you’re not making $200k/year consistently. Also, I was surprised at how many people without an original thought in their head earn $200k/year in NYC —- the city rewards a sort of dull ambition. Do you want to hang out with people who are intelligent and ambitious yet somehow fail to be interesting? If so, then NYC is for you!

i’d say there is a pretty big difference between Manhattan and the other boroughs in this regard though it’s still too expensive. i’ve found reason to go to Manhattan only a couple times in the past few years.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#87

Post by nickles »

Victerius wrote: post #71
nickles wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> should be heavy state intervention on it, preferably by doing the same as Vienna, which is holding >40% of the renting stock and charging according to income This is great policy if you want to make housing unaffordable. When supply is less than demand, prices go up. Those price increases incentivize builders to increase the housing stock (which subsequently lowers prices). Capping prices prevents the price mechani…

Rents are already through the roof. If that hasn't incentivized builders to build enough housing to lower rents in places people want to live, why not go for the centralized solution? CMV The "let the free market take care of it; government intervention can only make it unaffordable" view is standing on extremely shaky legs today.

> The "let the free market take care of it; government intervention can only make it unaffordable" view is standing on extremely shaky legs today.

The term “NIMBY” is commonly used to describe people who prevent new construction of housing. They typically use legal maneuvers (like requiring years of environmental review) to do this. By allowing this to continue, government intervention supports unaffordable housing.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#88

Post by spaniard89277 »

nickles wrote: post #82
spaniard89277 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet it isn't working in most european cities. Price increases and capital holders always build behind the offer/demand curve so they get a better yield from it. Also, rent is always high enough to milk as much as possible from modal income, as demand is pretty inelastic. Also, read carefully, I don't want price control directly onto the private sector but the adminsitration controlling a big chunk of the offer.

> I don't want price control directly onto the private sector but the adminsitration controlling a big chunk of the offer. If the government sets prices for 40% of the market, it’s price control by definition.

It doesn't work like that, because not all property nor customer is even. A luxury apartment is not competing with a 2 bedroom public housing apartment. And there will be floating population, there will people moving in, there will be people with special needs that public housing doesn't cover, etc etc

Maybe such situation would actually push investors to be innovative with housing for once. If regulations allow that, of course, which is important too.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#89

Post by iamben »

vehicles2b wrote: post #64
bigyikes wrote: post #23

I’ve had this thought floating around in my head for a while, and it seems wrong, but I’m not completely sure why. I’m hoping someone more knowledgeable might be able to set me straight. Prices on the coasts — like 5k rent — are astronomically high compared to prices in, say, the midwest. This shocks many people. You could easily make the same comparison between the midwest and some non-developed nation. The differen…

Can you clarify what you mean by development? As far as the apartments themselves, they can range from newly developed, to newly renovated, to very old and needing renovations. I figured the apartments along the coasts, and in particular the Manhattan area are quite old. I do think that development on a global scale has given people the ability to move to places like Manhattan, and so development outside, as well as…

One of my favourite time-sucks is watching property/design videos on YouTube. I'm constantly amazed at how expensive it is for shitty accommodation in New York. London is expensive, but the quality is (at least in my experience) far better for the money, even at the cheaper end.

Re: Manhattan rents cross $5k threshold for first time

#90

Post by mattzito »

ricardobeat wrote: post #70
TOMDM wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CMV Rent is high because the demand in large cities majorly out strips supply. All policies that attempt to address housing costs that don't increase supply are treating a symptom and not the underlying cause.

Increasing the supply alone does not counter the gentrification / ghetto effects the parent comment talked about, in fact it might amplify them. A gross oversimplification, but if you somehow make ten thousand new apartments available in Manhattan at $1k/month, they will eventually fill up with low-income tenants, which will make them undesirable. Pressure on all the existing $5K properties will remain the same.

Why would they fill up with low income tenants? Why would that make it undesirable?
Post reply on HN